The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition by making an existing interim order protecting the petitioner's life absolute, due to the non-appearance of respondents despite proper service.
The interim order protecting the petitioner's life was made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932
WP(C).No. 17313 of 2010(L)
PETITIONER(S):
MOIDEENKUTTY,S/O.KUNNAMPADATH ASSAINAR, KUMARANELLUR AMSOM,CHEKKOD DESOM, POST AANAKARA, OTTAPALAM TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
RESPONDENT(S):
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC NO.17313 OF 20101
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.3522/2008 OF SRO CHANGARAMKULAM DATED 30.6.2008.
EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE VATTAMKULAM VILLAGE DATED 13.11.2009.
EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSIGNER OF THE PROPERTY BY VATTAMKULAM VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 26.6.2008.
EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25.5.2010.
EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.5.2010.
K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
W.P.(C) No.17313 of 2010-L
Dated, this the Ist day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
K.M.Joseph, J.
The prayers in the writ petition are as follows:
“i. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,order or direction directing the respondents 2 and 3 to provide necessary and adequate protection to the life of the petitioner while entering into the property covered by Ext.P1 document.
ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,order or direction directing the Ist respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 representation filed by the petitioner.”
Though served, there is no appearance for the party respondents. In such circumstances we dispose of the writ
petition by making the interim order absolute.
(K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE.
(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE.
MS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim protection order in the writ petition should be made absolute in the absence of respondent appearance.
Moideenkutty
Superintendent of Police, Malappuram
Circle Inspector of Police, Ponnani
Sub Inspector of Police, Manthadam
Ismal Palakkal
Rafi Palakkal
K.M. Joseph
M.L. Joseph Francis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
